Could ACC’s HB2 move bring IRS problems for league?

download-3Federal tax filings indicate that the Atlantic Coast Conference has 501(3)(c) tax-exempt status. As we all know, the ACC’s Council of Presidents voted to pull all neutral-site conference competitions from the state of North Carolina while HB2 is still law.

For the record, the North Carolina-tied members of the council are:  Duke president Richard Brodhead, UNC chancellor Carol Folt, Wake Forest president Nathan Hatch, and NC State chancellor Randy Woodson.   Folt and Woodson are not publicly commenting on how they voted.  (These two state employees NEED to come clean on whether they supported this effort to sabotage and embarrass the state of North Carolina.)

Here is what the Internal Revenue Service says about political activities by 501(c)(3) organizations:

 […] Under federal tax law, section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on shakepublic policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography. All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention.
Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
• Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office;
Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more candidates’ positions and/or actions;
• Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election;
• Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election;
• Whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office;
• Whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election; and
• Whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office. […]

One could argue the ACC’s position expresses approval of the position of Roy Cooper AND the North Carolina Democrat Party.

kermitOne could argue that the statement is delivered close in time to the election.  (We are less than two months away from a big vote for governor, council of state, and General Assembly. HB2 was passed in March. Why raise a stink about it NOW?  The ACC vote is being cited by Democrat candidates in a number of key races as ammo against their Republican opponents.) 

One could also argue that the issue of HB2 has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office. 

I guess it’s time to start making these folks PAY TAXES.  It’s a slap in the face to North Carolinians who get bled dry every April 15th to have these people — tax exempt and raking in all kinds of taxpayer-funded benefits — playing partisan politics and sabotaging the state. 

(Jus’ saying.’ ) 

9 thoughts on “Could ACC’s HB2 move bring IRS problems for league?

  1. This issue should be immediately taken to the NC Department of Revenue and the IRS by complaints filed against these political hacks.

    The NCSU and UNCCH Chancellors voted in a representative capacity for their state funded institutions and covering up how they used their votes is outrageous in and of itself. They both need to be fired unless they can show they vigorously opposed this political hatchet job.

    1. I agree with both. Their silence basically speaks more than if they actually admit they were voting against the wishes of the people of NC. I guarantee they voted to move, and we need to move them out of office.

  2. I keep asking—where are the UNC Board of Governors? They need to intervene immediately with UNC-CH and NC State and get to the bottom of this insanity. These chancellors need to go if they voted to take the ACC games out of NC.

    1. Fire, sue, revoke any and all tax benefits and BAN the ACC and NCAA from North Carlina. McCrory, Forest and Berger must hit back hard NOW.

      Enough is enough.

  3. Take it a step further. The NBA should be sued for moving the All Star game simply because most people, in North Carolina, self identify as normal.

  4. I think it’s a great idea. FIGHT BACK! Of course the IRS is going to hate the very idea of taxing an anti-McCrory ACC and NCAA, but surely the NC Dept of Revenue will have some sense. North Carolina is only purple on alternate Thursdays; there are plenty of citizens left who are old-time independent individualists, and they’ve just about had it with the far left.

  5. The ACC, NFL, NBA, MBA, and every other sports non-profit is simply a slush fund for those fortunate enough to be on the band wagon. They should all be kicked off the tax exempt gravy train. They all stick their noses in where they shouldn’t and they are all a bunch of money grubbing progressives hypocrites. I won’t watch a single game of any sort these days since they have all decided that they have to tell me what to believe and do. Screw them all.

  6. *crickets*

    Has anyone heard of any actions being taken by the state against the ACC? Or, are we going to just suck it up and take the abuse?

Comments are closed.